Martin Tindi Khaemba v Law Society ff Kenya & 2 others [2017] KEHC 4721 (KLR)
- Court
- High Court of Kenya
- Case number
- 4721
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 4721 (KLR)
- Decided
- 31 May 2017
The court found that the Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal had the requisite jurisdiction to hear the complaint and that the motion was not premature.
Facts
The applicant, Martin Tindi Khaemba, filed an application for judicial review against the Law Society of Kenya and the Advocates Disciplinary Committee, alleging that the disciplinary proceedings against him were premature and res judicata due to a High Court order.
Issues
- Whether the motion is premature.
- Whether the disciplinary action by the Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal is res judicata.
Reasoning
The court ruled that the Advocates Act provides for a Complaints Commission and a Disciplinary Tribunal, both of which have jurisdiction over complaints against advocates. The High Court's order in a previous case upholding the applicant's conduct does not preclude the Tribunal from proceeding with the disciplinary action.
Outcome
The application for an order of prohibition and certiorari was dismissed.
Orders
- The application for an order of prohibition and certiorari is dismissed.
Authorities cited
Legislation (2)
- The Advocates Act, Cap 16 of the Laws of Kenya
- The Law Reform Act
Cases cited (1)
- Republic vs. Advocates Disciplinary Tribunal & 2 others ex parte Mpuko Nahason Mwiti [2015]
Loading judgment…